Ramavtar Singh v. State of Rajasthan through PP

ORDER SB Cr Misc Bail Application No. 3986/2011 Ramavtar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through PP

17.5.2011 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr MC Jain - for the petitioner Mr GS Fauzdar, PP – for the State BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has not been named in the FIR. In fact, it is Jitendra Singh, who has been named in the FIR and he was running the company. Petitioner was earlier holding Directorship but he resigned in the month of February, 2009. Looking to the aforesaid, petitioner may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned PP, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application. 2 After taking into consideration the rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect the outcome of the trial, but looking to the facts of this case, I allow this bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Therefore, the SHO/IO of the Police Station –Kardhani, District – Jaipur is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner/s Ramavtar Singh in FIR No. 53/2011 registered for offence under Section/s 420, 406 and 120B IPC, he shall enlarge petitioner on bail provided petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i)He shall make himself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii)He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; (iii)He shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. 3 (iv)He shall not commit same and similar offence during the period of bail. bnsharma (MN BHANDARI), J.